JeffWright Posted November 23, 2006 Share #61 Posted November 23, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm sadden by this. I canceled my order a week after the news about all the problems. I read this and now will wait to see just where Leica and digital M's are in two years. My read on all this is they pushed a premature product out the door and have been back filling since then. With the coding requirements and filters, I see them moving more and more into closed system. I'll see what Leica has in 2008 at Photokina but until then will stick with and upgrade my Canons. But I'll still hang out here. I really want a digital M but just not this interation. Maybe I'll get my first Leica, a IIIG, fixed and go shot some film. I'm holding out for an M9 now....At least I won't feel like it's the end of the world that I can't afford an M8 now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 23, 2006 Posted November 23, 2006 Hi JeffWright, Take a look here NEW info from my dealer!!! . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mahler_one Posted November 23, 2006 Share #62 Posted November 23, 2006 Allow me to add my thanks as well. Questions, of course, remain 1. Will newly shipped M8 cameras also need the IR filters? If not, will Leica offer to change "older" M8s for the newer ones? 2. Will one now need to encode each older lens at the cost of $150 per lens? Simply multiply your lenses by the cost to see what the addtional sums will be. Some here have cheerfully reported that the cost of encoding is not to be considered, and is simply another facet of owning Leica equipment. Ditto with the IR filters. I respectfully disagree. Early users of the M8 reported that there was no need to encode the older lenses. One now wonders if Leica knew from the start that encoding of the lenses would be needed to deal with the IR problem. We eagerly await the full details of the Leica M8 "solution". My order for the M8 remains, but I admit to being very pleased with the results obtained with my Nikon digital camera ( in my case the D200 ) and digital lenses. Not heresy, simply observation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lxlim Posted November 23, 2006 Share #63 Posted November 23, 2006 1) R. Horn is gonna go ballistic, Ralf - did your dealer know you were going to post this on the web? 2) " But the sensor still requires IR filters to do what it should do without them...." You do understand the difference with rangefinder lenses? That an IR filter heavy enough to fully correct IR with Leica's short focus lenses would lead to fuzzy blurry color-fringed corner imaging? I've seen what a Canon 14 or 20 or 17-35 lens does in the corners on a 1Ds or a 5D. Leica specced a filter that allows my 15mm Voigtlander lens to perform about 500% better in the corners while reducing 90-95% of the IR. And it performs THAT task extremely well and exactly as designed. On the M8 I can add another filter to cut the IR further and improve the color rendition - Which filter can sharpen up and remove the purple blurry mush in the corners of 1Ds/5D wide-angle pictures? Thanks Andy. Exactly the reasons why I am thinking about a Leica M8 rather than buying a 5D/1DSmkII to accompany the rest of my canon equipment. Alex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted November 23, 2006 Share #64 Posted November 23, 2006 Well, the filter thing is a bugger, to be sure, but I am keeping my M8 and will take them up on both two filters and 30% off some lens. I will probably use that to get the 28/2.0 Asph instead of the 28/2.8 Asph. An extra stop from heaven Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsmith Posted November 23, 2006 Share #65 Posted November 23, 2006 Our problems have been with the camera, not the lenses, how about 30 % off a new M8 (for those of us who need 2) The 30% off the full retail of Leica USA lenses is about the same that we pay for brand new 1 year warranty "grey" market lenses anyways, so it's really not getting anything. Also Leica should exchange our cameras, not make us wait to fix their mistakes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 23, 2006 Share #66 Posted November 23, 2006 Folks there is more to this announcement than what was already spoke of. i think there are still some things to be said. let's wait on the official announcemnt, I hear it is 25 pages long, so there has to be more to this. But for me a repair program will not work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 23, 2006 Share #67 Posted November 23, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Folks there is more But for me a repair program will not work. You should agree for at least once, Guy ... I guess that's why they didn't send you a test camera for all the work you've done? Sorry, I know this is a bad joke ... just want to say Hi to you. Happy Thanksgiving day! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 23, 2006 Share #68 Posted November 23, 2006 To you to also Simon, i want a loaner or something . Pro's should not be without a exchange or loaner or something, we deserve that to feed our families. I will accept the filter issue but i will only bend so far over , if you know what i mean. Okay back to family Have a Great Day Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
canlogic Posted November 23, 2006 Share #69 Posted November 23, 2006 Pro or not they will need to give anyone who wants one a loaner or a guaranteed 4-5 day turn around. I still think an exchange is the best bet. I mean everyone could say no I want to return it then just buy the new (fixed) model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aj37 Posted November 23, 2006 Share #70 Posted November 23, 2006 Pro's should not be without a exchange or loaner or something, we deserve that to feed our families. How were you feeding your family a month ago, before your M8 was delivered? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aj37 Posted November 23, 2006 Share #71 Posted November 23, 2006 I'm holding out for an M9 now....At least I won't feel like it's the end of the world that I can't afford an M8 now. Nah, wait for the M10 -- they should have all the problems sorted out by then. Personally, I'm waiting for the M14 with the antigravity neckstrap. [Kind of reminds me of a cartoon that my camera dealer used to have taped up in his display case: It showed a guy looking at another guy's family pictures and saying, "No, I don't have any pictures of my children, or my grandchildren either. I'm not gonna waste my money on a camera until they get done improving them."] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chetccox Posted November 23, 2006 Share #72 Posted November 23, 2006 When you get a new tractor for your corn harvest, do you not try to sell the old one or trade it in? Perhaps that is what he had to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aj37 Posted November 23, 2006 Share #73 Posted November 23, 2006 When you get a new tractor for your corn harvest, do you not try to sell the old one or trade it in? Perhaps that is what he had to do. Not if I plan to get the corn in! I keep the old one in the shed until I'm sure the new one will get the job done. I don't plant all my acreage in the same hybrid variant, either. (I see someone looked at my profile! No, I'm not really a corn farmer... but like everyone else who lives where I do, I know people who are.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
think Posted November 23, 2006 Share #74 Posted November 23, 2006 1) R. Horn is gonna go ballistic, Ralf - did your dealer know you were going to post this on the web? 2) " But the sensor still requires IR filters to do what it should do without them...." You do understand the difference with rangefinder lenses? That an IR filter heavy enough to fully correct IR with Leica's short focus lenses would lead to fuzzy blurry color-fringed corner imaging? I've seen what a Canon 14 or 20 or 17-35 lens does in the corners on a 1Ds or a 5D. Leica specced a filter that allows my 15mm Voigtlander lens to perform about 500% better in the corners while reducing 90-95% of the IR. And it performs THAT task extremely well and exactly as designed. On the M8 I can add another filter to cut the IR further and improve the color rendition - Which filter can sharpen up and remove the purple blurry mush in the corners of 1Ds/5D wide-angle pictures? Hopefully not too ballistic as this was in the early part of the published copy... "I thought it best to just give you the highlights which can be shared with your dealer or consumers. Christian and Shirley will make sure all the appropriate letters are mailed on Monday."... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
atufte Posted November 23, 2006 Share #75 Posted November 23, 2006 Quote: "Frankly, Jamie fixed 90% of the IR problem with his C-1 color profile. I went back and reprocessed a bunch of my first shots with the M8, and if I had been using THAT profile I most likely would never have blown the whistle on the magenta cast when shooting the black velvet background camera pics. Not that it is 100% cured, but the vast majority of images are just fine now ... and in fact exhibit the look and feel I had fully expected from a M digital." Question: I can't see why Leica cannot implement this kind of color correction "in camera" in an firmware fix, if it's possible with a C1 profile made by people in this forum i can't see why Leica with their resources (maybe they should hire Jamie :-) could'nt make a similar profile to implement the raw file "in camera" ...? (with a custom setting in the camera menu to swith this profile on/off like let's say sRBG/aRGB...) It would be much better with "a 90% less IR fix" straight from the camera, than being totally dependant of C1, and for those of the M8 shooters that's shoot JPG only...? I think the majority of M8 users, would be satisfied the 90% IR reduction in camera and maybe skip the filters except in extreme situations, like back in the old days when we sometimes had to use a filter in some special light conditions... Just a tought... :-) Best Regards Alexander Tufte http://www.alexandertufte.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erg Posted November 23, 2006 Share #76 Posted November 23, 2006 Your assuming that everyone returns there camera for warranty work. That may not be the case. Well, that' s very likely. I'am 90% satisfied with my M8, but who doesn't want his problems (banding) fixed, including me. If a hardwarefix is necessary at least most of the current M8s will have to be shipped to Solms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveEP Posted November 23, 2006 Share #77 Posted November 23, 2006 The 30% is welcome, IF you already intended to buy another new Leica lens, but they are only giving you the dealer discount, so they are not really losing any money. They may also upset a few dealers in the process, because these are lenses that the dealer didn't get to sell. Regarding the IR filter issue, I keep coming back to the thoughts about if they anounced that you needed IR filters at the same time they anounced the release of the M8, how many people would still have bought it, AND bought filters too? My guess is most would..... I am still on a waiting list, and my guess is that this anouncement is not going to make that list any shorter. I will gladly take delivery as soon as I get to the top of the list, and buy filters as required. For those who don't want to, GREAT, please remove your names from the lists so I can get mine quicker!! Ofcourse, the next problem will be second hand bodies. How will some one be able to tell if it is an early one that was upgraded or not? I'll bet there are some that never get sent in.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erg Posted November 23, 2006 Share #78 Posted November 23, 2006 There's no sensor change. Cheers, Sean Hi Sean, that would be good news. Isn't there any hardwarefix that has to be done in Solms ? Best, Erhan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 23, 2006 Share #79 Posted November 23, 2006 Will newly shipped M8 cameras also need the IR filters? Elliot--Yes. The design of the M8 is unchanged. The camera will work the same but without threats of streaking and green blobs. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bloggs Posted November 24, 2006 Share #80 Posted November 24, 2006 Joe: I'll direct your attention to: http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/10054-why-leica-did-what-they-did.html With all due respect, perhaps we just have different ideas of what constitutes fuzzy and blurry. Can you say 'red herring'? I say they could have blocked the IR without changing the glass thickness and you show me pictures from DSLR lenses? Also, can you post the full original the Leica crop came from? Here's an apples to apples comparison: Voigtlander 15mm v Sigma 12-24mm (f5.6) The Voigtlander 15mm, mounted on the Canon 5D, showing a corner crop from the true corners of the lens, rather than from a 1.33x crop. As to the different types of attacking IR - I have seen it posted that both dye filtration and dichroic filtration for IR change their effectiveness with the angle of incidence of the light. Which of course is the root problem Leica has been fighting all along in making digital compatable with their tiny, close-to-the-sensor, designed-for-film M lenses. Dye filtration is angle dependent to the extent that light at steep angles has to pass through an effectively thicker slice of glass to reach the sensor. This effect is nowhere near as dramatic as the angle effect of a dichroic filter, and the steeper the cutoff of the dye filter, the lesser the effect. For example, at 60 degrees from perpendicular, light has to pass through twice as much glass as it does perpendicular. So, if you're dealing with a frequency of light where the filter passes 98% of light, it will pass 0.98^2 or about 96% of light. Not much change. A dichroic filter that is beginning to filter a few % of a particular frequency on axis may cut off that frequency entirely at 10 degrees off axis... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.